Making everyone happy is impossible. Pissing them off is a piece of cake. I like cake.

Sunday, May 11, 2008

Nadine Dorries: still a corrupt liar

Has anyone noticed the uncanny resemblance between Nadine Dorries—a barking mad, out-of-touch-with-reality, lying cow in the UK Parliament—and Margot Wallstrom—a barking mad, out-of-touch-with-reality, lying cow in the European Union Commission? Are they in any way related? I think we should be told...

Now, as we all know, Nadine Dorries is a horrible, stinking liar who must be perpetually having to change the charred remains of her knickers (assuming that she wears any, of course). One can only hope that her children are so ashamed of their mother that her behaviour will act as a deterrent and they will become the sanest, most honest people on the planet.

Still, the saga rolls on. The Ministry of Truth has become rather adept at tracking down her lies and deceit; for instance, Marie Stopes International does not—contrary to assertions made by Dorries—support a lowering of the abortion age limit.

“Nadine Dorries, the new Conservative MP for Mid Bedfordshire, was parachuted into the constituency at the last minute by Conservative Central Office, just as she was parachuted into Hazel Grove (to the fury of local Tories) shortly before the 2001 election.

Why, we asked, is she always first choice for the parachute jump when Tory HQ in London decides to despatch its own candidate?

Nadine Dorries’s children were until recently classmates at Ampleforth College (one of the leading Catholic schools in the country, recently embarassed by a sexually deviant teacher!) with the children of one Trish Morris. As fellow parents Trish and Nadine got to know each other rather well.

And who is Trish?

Under her more formal moniker of Baroness Morris, she is vice-chairman of the Conservative party in charge of candidate selection!

Furthermore, you simply must read this Unity article, which corrals a whole selection of Nadine's lies, including the fact that Nadine lied about her age whilst campaigning.

I should make it clear that as far as I can tell, Nadine's website was and is - as stated on her website - funded from the Incidental Expenses Provision and not the new Communications Allowance, but I would advise any MP who is confused/concerned about such things to read The Communications Allowance and the use of House stationery (2.31MB PDF) because, until the Green Book is revised, it offers the most comprehensive guide available on websites paid for with the public's money.

But in Nadine's case the misuse of taxpayer's money is clear and unarguable, so in this post we do not need to go any further than these extracts from Teh Green Book (870Kb PDF)

5.1.1. Scope of the allowanceThe Incidental Expenses Provision (IEP) is available to meet costs incurred on Members' Parliamentary duties. It cannot be used to meet personal costs, or the costs of party political activities or campaigning.

Expenditure not allowable:—Campaigning on behalf of a political party or cause—Communications or travel on personal or party political matters

There are so many examples of Nadine breaking these clear-cut rules on her website - particularly in that section she laughingly describes as a 'blog' - that it's hard to know where to start (or end) but I think a good example is her recent targeting of four Labour MPs over the abortion issue, as it ticks all the boxes; it's personal in nature (though most of the purely personal entries on her blog are more vindictive than this) , it's party-political (look at who she targets), and it's done in support of a cause.

Tim also highlights ten... er... nine reasons not to trust Mad Nad, including the fact that she is not only incompetent but a self-confessed liar.

She's a liar:And, when she was forced to relocate her press conference to College Green, she was shocked to discover that she needed a permit there, too (and permission under SOCPA). To get her way and get her face on camera, she lied... outright and without shame:

"As it was we de-camped onto College Green. Within seconds another security guard arrived. He asked me did I have a permit? I said yes. I lied, we began. Perhaps someone would now like to report me to the standards committee?"—Nadine Dorries (07 May)

I've used this rather benign example because (a) here she admits it and (b) all of the other times she might be called a liar (example), one cannot rule out her instead being understandably mistaken because she is so impossibly stupid.

Although, it should be ten as Tim actually misses out one very obvious reason not to trust her, i.e. because she's quite obviously insane.

A few weeks ago, Nadine Dorries claimed that no NHS hospital would perform an abortion after 16 weeks, unless out of dire need.

She went on radio to repeat this claim, and accused someone who contradicted her of being a liar.

Dorries announced that she was tabling a written question on the subject.

Well, Dorries did indeed lodge such a question, for which there is now a formal written answer - one that proves that NHS hospitals routinely perform abortions after 16 weeks. In other words, she's entirely, irrefutably wrong. In fact, roughly a third of procedures take place in NHS hospitals....

(Incidentally, the parliamentary answer given quotes figures almost identical to those found by Unity in reaching the same conclusion, i.e. that Nadine Dorries is a liar. Huh. Turns out information really is king.)

Bookdrunk then sums up with a couple of lines that made me laugh out loud...

Would Nadine Dorries now like to retract her previous claims, and apologise for calling her opponents liars? Or would you perhaps instead like to go to the moon on my pig-rocket?

I have no idea what a pig-rocket is but, yes, I would love to go to the moon on yours, Bookdrunk. Because Mad Nad is not going to admit that she tells lies. Oh, unless those lies are told to Palace of Westminster officers, of course.

But never mind, at least her lies are so brazen that they keep us all entertained. Here's Bookdrunk again and, unlike Dorries, he has actually read the report that he's writing about (an awful lot of us bloggers do that: I wonder why...).

I think this report insults the intelligence of the public and MPs alike.

No improvement in neo-natal care in twelve years? Really? So where has all the money that has been pumped into neo-natal services gone then?

A baby born at 23 weeks today stands no better a chance of living than it did in 1996?

You'd never guess, but this is a selective and obvious distortion of the report's findings.

The report actually looks at births up until 2005—and does indeed show significant improvements in the survival of babies... but only amongst those born at 24 and 25 weeks. Of 497 babies admitted to intensive care in 2000–05, 236 (47 per cent) survived to discharge compared with 174 of 490 (36 per cent) in 1994–95.

In other words, not only does the report show what she claims it doesn't, but it provides evidence further that her position is full of crap.

Out of all the MPs that this blog has covered over the last few years, it's safe to say that none has been as underhand, as genuinely unpleasant, manipulative, vindictive and dishonest as both Dorries has been and apparently is. She is both a disgrace to politics as a whole and a liability to the Conservative party.

I have little more to add, except to point out that Nadine Dorries is still a shameless, shameful fucking liar who should never be in any position of authority.

Interesting stuff. My only reservation is that I'd be interested to know what proof there is that she and Morris are actually friends, though.

The fact their children attend the same school doesn't mean a lot; the nature of boarding school means that - bar the one "open weekend" a year - most parents never even see each other, let alone actually have time to strike up a friendship.

Not to say it's untrue, but Private Eye could have qualified that a little more, perhaps.

Thanks DK, double take, thanks DK. That's not a bad round up of the Nad Madness.

Someone I know, far away from Manchester, is a Clin Neg lawyer and has a case with a (just) post-16 week medically essential abortion in an NHS hospital.

A latter-day Nadine Dorries nurse-ethicist-fantasist pronounced that the outcome of this procedure "was breathing" - clearly a twisted fantasy or hallucination.

This enhanced the parents' already desperate experience no end, requiring post mortem, death certificate, funeral arrangements and costs, added to the legal damages, and proved that while Dorries is one on her own as an MP, there are other manic pro lifers out there who are more than happy to hallucinate and lie for their cause.

And Dorries still denies she is a pro lifer (whereas I and DK and Unity and others are pro-deathers?).

Just a small point, since DK so vehemently berates Nadine Dories... how good is his word if he can't even label Nadine's photo with the correct name?!!! If he feels knowledgeable enough to slag her off, he really should be able to back it up by putting the right label on her picture!!! I rest my case.BTW.... whatever her politics, she's gorgeous!!! :D

What a pathetic and boring excuse for an article.If it wasn’t for the fact I’m far more intelligent than the pure genius who created this disgusting article then I would assume this article was written by none other than the scum king of spin Mr. Damien McBride. Instead I can be sure this article was written by somebody far superior with the talent of spin than McBride and even Harriet Harman (although her talent of spin is that somehow she manages to blag the idea she knows what she is doing. Let’s be honest, she doesn't have a clue). The fact of the matter is that this author is both pathetic and has no idea what he/she is talking about. It can be proved with relatively little effort because the author has based his/her weak argument on guesswork and coincidences, and I am offended that the internet allows articles of such substance to be posted. By articles of such substance I mean false allegations and put bluntly, an article that lacks any class or skill. The world should be ashamed of itself; it has gotten to the stage where people with an IQ below George W. Bush have been allowed to post lies on the internet. This is not acceptable. Maybe instead of being the type of person that hides behind a website to weave your lies you can at least 'man up' and do what all people like yourselves should do which is stop pretending to be a journalist, keep quiet and go back to the meaningless life you are trying to escape by writing about Ms. Dorries. Especially when there are criminals such as Gordon Brown running the country. Whilst you do this, please try and think about how such a filthy article could affect someone just trying to do their job. It may not be up to your standard, but let’s be honest, you posted on the internet so you must be a nobody, anybody can post on the internet, even I, and I’m not exactly the CEO of Tesco. This woman has a family and a life; your disgusting words affect this life. It’s unbelievably selfish and pathetic to try and affect said life. Maybe think about how you'd like it if one day someone important came home and called you a 'shameful fucking liar' (your words about Ms. Dorries which rather ironically suit YOU more than they suit her). You're a liar. You're a fake. You're everything you claim to hate about the Conservative MP you're complaining about. Grow up or give up. The world will be forever bored by pretenders like you. IF you do grow up, how about you do some real research into politics. There are far more important and interesting topics such as how our current Prime Minister is unelected. I could finish my reply with a witty little comment such as 'oh and can someone please go and give this author lithium' but WAIT A MINUTE, that's right, I’m not a 14 year old girl ranting about her best friend who didn’t invite me to her birthday party, so I’ll finish with a simple, thanks for reminding me why I love politics: because our beloved country will always be run by Nazi's like you and eventually something must be done about it.PS. I am disappointed at some of the other people who have commented on this page for believing the lies posted on this website. You (the website as a whole) should be ashamed that you trick the public into believing the rubbish, conspiracy based lies you post.Mr. T. Phomas

rocko i like you, you know why? because i haven't seen a grown up use a smiley face in... well ever.you lie, i lie, why is it only this woman who is scrutinized? seriously, there are so many more important topics in life. why does it matter that her blog said she lied?

Phomas, she's an MP. MPs are accountable to the voters. That's us. She's been known to sue people in the past, for saying things about her, yet she's never had a go at any of us for calling her out on her lies.

Wonderful thing, democracy, we get to (try and) hold our MPs to account. Can't do it if we can't say anything about them though.

Why the fuck is this post still getting comments a year after it was made? Linked to recently or just top google result?

It's not easy trying to write a statement denying everything when evidence to the contrary abounds so.

What she needs is a break!

This is why (according to her own blog) tomorrow, when the Speaker is planning to make an important announcement to MP's on the recent scandal, Nadine is going to have a nice fun ride in an RAF jet that was probably bought by the tax-payer for something a little more important.

At least the travel to RAF Boscombe Down won't cost too much - it might be fairly remote from her constituency and Parliament, but it's very convenient for her infamous home in the Cotswolds.

I have never heard any medical person use the word "parasite" as any kind of classification for a foetus.

Please provide a reputable citation for this classification, along with the gestational dates to which it applies.

I expect you know that, technically, a term foetus or a breast-feeding infant would match the medical definition of "parasite"?

Presumably you believe such a child is "not fully human"?

Of course it is. Because "parasite" is a completely useless term in this context - has nothing to do with "viability", which is why is not used.

Presumably you are also aware that, legally, the rights of the child as an individual member of society begin at the cutting of the umbilical cord? And that, a child born at 23-weeks actually has MORE rights than one still in the womb at 40-weeks? It has nothing at all to do with gestation.

Since you like "facts", why can't you appreciate, like the people who peer-review articles in scientific journals, that infants can and do survive at 23-weeks' gestation nowadays (i.e. forty years after abortion was legalised, during which time, science and technology have improved year-on-year and have propagated internationally).

You fail to grasp entirely that viability is not a hard function of time spent in the womb (which, by the way cannot be actually known to a suitable degree of accuracy using current technology, ultrasound, for the purpose of determining categorically whether a foetus is 23 or 24 weeks).

Infants born at much later dates than this do not always survive. This is not because they are inherently not "independently viable". It merely serves as evidence that the issue is not quite as black and white as you would have yourself believe.

Because it is real life.

Term babies often need medical intervention to save them from dying around birth. Being thus not "independently viable" are they then also therefore not "fully human"?

In the future, technology will enable in-vitro (in other words outside-the-mother) gestation.

Your silly criteria and definitions would then exclude termination at ANY gestation.

Tell me honestly: would you agree to carry out a 23-week abortion for non-medical reasons, knowing that typically 5% of foetuses born at this stage survive to one year, more than half without any disability?

Then go and learn how to perform one.

Then answer the question again.

You might not like Dorries or her religious point of view, or her supporters, but have more self-respect than to use these as reasons to kid yourself!

When I learned that Nadine Dorries held an unauthorised press conference without permission and then TOLD A FIB to the security guard I almost smashed my computer screen in fury. Is such WICKEDNESS POSSIBLE?!! Hitler never did ANYTHING so wicked and LOOK WHAT HAPPENED TO HIM. How dare the little LIAR do such a dreadful thing. Oh my God IT MAKES ME SOOO MAD!!! And it looks like she may have said some things I disagree with some time too and i cant bear it i cant i cant I CANT I CANT. If I go on any longer I AM GOING TO START USING NAUGHTY WORDS just to show how REALLY ANGRY I AM. LIAR LIAR LIAR WICKED ILLICIT-PRESS-CONFERENCE-IN-THE-WRONG-PLACE-HOLDING LIAR!!!!!

any good comments about Dorries she writes herself or gets friends to write them for her.

There are things she needs to answer: things she has told lies about.Anyone on this comment page who has said she is a good MP needs to know there are people in Liverpool who know her damn well and intend to make comments.